Re: Thoughts on IBM z/OS Version 2 Release 3 enhancements

2019-04-24 Thread Timothy Sipples
If you're in a hurry to start testing now, and if you ask nicely Timothy Sipples IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM Z & LinuxONE

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 19:18:49 -0500, Walt Farrell wrote: >On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:10:59 -0500, John McKown wrote: > >>... I guess the developers went with the easy to test rule of "8 or >>less is a PASSWORD, larger is a PASSPHRASE". But that's just a guess on my >>part. > >Not so that RACF will

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Walt Farrell
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:10:59 -0500, John McKown wrote: >> >> >> Why are passwords restricted to a maximum length of 8, and passphrases >> restricted to a minimum length of 9? >> > >Passwords are restricted to a max of 8 for historical reasons. They were >once kept in SYS1.UADS -- the TSO

Re: SMF Log Blocks

2019-04-24 Thread Bonnie Ordonez
Hello Stan, SMF log blocks are mapped to include more information than just a single SMF record per block. The structure of the log block is not provided as an IBM external interface. IXGxxx services are programming interfaces, but

Re: Volume compare utility

2019-04-24 Thread Stuart zseries
If you still have my libraries around, I had a utility to do this. I think it was called COMPDASD (or maybe SCECOMPD?). The JCL to run it would have had the same name. Email me if you want details. On 4/22/19 4:51 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: > Sorry for not taking the time to search the

Re: Volume compare utility

2019-04-24 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >Most folks seem to think that we're being a little silly, which is actually >reassuring. No, you are NOT silly. Trust me. Actually I appreciate your posts here in IBM-MAIN. >I did get one off-list offer of a product that that sounds pretty great, but >we may just

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 18:24:29 +, Mark Jacobs wrote: >I've experienced sites that allows paste in the "enter email" field, but >disallows it in the "enter your email address a second time" field. > Needed: Address Book integration, even as many MUAs (but not web forms) will autocomplete

Re: Volume compare utility

2019-04-24 Thread Jesse 1 Robinson
Thanks for the thoughtful analysis. Our excessive caution stems from our being novices with PPRC and the fact that we're doing production this time. We did the DR site a while back knowing that any discrepancy could be overwritten by XRC mirroring. Most folks seem to think that we're being a

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Mark Jacobs
I've experienced sites that allows paste in the "enter email" field, but disallows it in the "enter your email address a second time" field. Mark Jacobs Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. GPG Public Key - https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get=markjac...@protonmail.com

Re: dfsort

2019-04-24 Thread Ron Thomas
Brilliant Kolusu ! Many Thanks !! Thanks again for all .. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Seymour J Metz
> The only proper way to validate an email address is to transmit a message > to it, and have the requestor prove it was received. Well, you can validate the syntax if you actually RTFRFC, and you can verify that the MX for the host name exists. If the MX permits VRFY you can check, but these

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Seymour J Metz
> I've encountered one that disables Paste into the email field. Was the developer trying to encourage typos? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Paul Gilmartin

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Seymour J Metz
> But - What do you do if that website does not allow cut/copy/paste in the > first place? I would use language not permitted in polite society. I'd probably also complain to the webmaster. Fortunately I haven't run into that particular piece of idiocy. I have, alas, run into sites where I

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread John McKown
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:12 PM Elardus Engelbrecht < elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za> wrote: > John McKown wrote: > > >So I type the password in on a text editor, then cut'n'paste it into the > web site. > > Good approach where you can't see what you typed in the first place and > you don't want

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Elardus Engelbrecht
John McKown wrote: >So I type the password in on a text editor, then cut'n'paste it into the web >site. Good approach where you can't see what you typed in the first place and you don't want to go the hassle to reset your id. But - What do you do if that website does not allow cut/copy/paste

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread John McKown
> > > Why are passwords restricted to a maximum length of 8, and passphrases > restricted to a minimum length of 9? > Passwords are restricted to a max of 8 for historical reasons. They were once kept in SYS1.UADS -- the TSO repository for userids, passwords, and TSO information in the beginning

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:39:04 -0500, John McKown wrote: >On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 9:28 AM Steve Smith wrote: > >> The only proper way to validate an email address is to transmit a message >> to it, and have the requestor prove it was received. Every other test is >> wrong, but the asinine forms

Re: dfsort

2019-04-24 Thread Sri h Kolusu
> I am wondering/believing that JOINKEYS could do all of this in one single swoop..> Now, waiting for Sri ... ;-) Elardus Engelbrecht. Like minds think alike. : ) Massimo has already posted a solution using Joinkeys. However he came up with an idea where the input file is SORTED twice ( Subtask

Re: Volume compare utility

2019-04-24 Thread R.S.
Indeed, such tool is usually not needed, it is enough to know the copy service ended with RC=0. It can be FlashCopy, TF/Clone, SRDF, PPRC, XRC, Shadowimage. One see the job finished with not errors so he's pretty sure that source and target volumes are the same. However let's assume the copy

Re: Thoughts on IBM z/OS Version 2 Release 3 enhancements

2019-04-24 Thread Glenn Wilcock
We just finished up an early test with a handful of clients and are in the process of closing all of the V2R3 APARs. (Due to preReq's, they all can't close at the same time). The plan is for all of the ptf's to be available in May. The support will be in the base of V2R4. Thanks, Glenn

Re: Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread John McKown
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 9:28 AM Steve Smith wrote: > The only proper way to validate an email address is to transmit a message > to it, and have the requestor prove it was received. Every other test is > wrong, but the asinine forms that require you to enter your email address > twice are the

Re: dfsort

2019-04-24 Thread Ron Thomas
Thanks a lot Massimo ! this is excellent . Regards Ron T -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Email validation (was Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank)

2019-04-24 Thread Steve Smith
The only proper way to validate an email address is to transmit a message to it, and have the requestor prove it was received. Every other test is wrong, but the asinine forms that require you to enter your email address twice are the most wrong. sas On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 9:28 AM Seymour J

Re: Thoughts on IBM z/OS Version 2 Release 3 enhancements

2019-04-24 Thread Richards, Robert B.
I used SIS under ServiceLink for all my research. It immediately redirects to: https://idaas.iam.ibm.com/idaas/oidc/endpoint/default/authorize?response_type=id_token%20token_id=NGRmOTc1MzktYTZhYS00_uri=https://www-03.ibm.com/ibmlink/sso/redirectNew.jsp=N0.10345997100193072=openid -Original

Re: Thoughts on IBM z/OS Version 2 Release 3 enhancements

2019-04-24 Thread Gord Tomlin
On 2019-04-24 02:58, Timothy Sipples wrote: IBM also wrote: The ability to back up and restore individual z/OS UNIX files residing in zFS data sets is now available on z/OS V2.3 through PTFs for APARs across multiple components: OA54218 (z/OS UNIX System Services), OA56145 (zFS), OA52703

Re: Mainframe Report meets abrupt end | Computerworld Shark Tank

2019-04-24 Thread Seymour J Metz
Currently RFC 5322 for addresses in the header and RFC 5321 for addresses in the envelope, unless you're using international (UTF-8) e-mail. I was actually thinking of "validation" of the local part, where some web developers can't be bothered to read the syntax before deciding what

Re: Thoughts on IBM z/OS Version 2 Release 3 enhancements

2019-04-24 Thread Richards, Robert B.
OA54218 (UA98763) OA56145 (UA98802) OA52703 (PTF not named/available yet) OA52836 (UA99019 - Not yet available) OA55165 (UA98876 - Not yet available) -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples Sent: Wednesday,

Re: dfsort

2019-04-24 Thread Massimo Biancucci
Ron, I think this could do the needed: //ST010 EXEC PGM=SORT //SYSOUT DD SYSOUT=* //EXCLUDE DD * 4046340¦CORPORATIVO 4046564¦CORPORATIVO 4046564¦ESTADO 4047131¦CORPORATIVO 4047460¦CORPORATIVO 4047479¦CORPORATIVO /* //ALL DD * 4046340¦CORPORATIVO 4046564¦CORPORATIVO 4046564¦ESTADO

Re: Thoughts on IBM z/OS Version 2 Release 3 enhancements

2019-04-24 Thread Timothy Sipples
Brian Westerman wrote: >No, I think he's right, it says in the document that it is >supposed to be available in June of 2019. z/OS 2.4 isn't >going to be available until September. Actually, IBM wrote: >Announced functionality will be available by June 30, 2019, >if not sooner. IBM also wrote:

Next meeting of the GSE UK Security Working Group - 6th June

2019-04-24 Thread Mark Wilson
Ladies and Gentlemen, The next meeting of the GSE UK Security Working Group, will take place on Thursday 6th June 2019 at the new offices of RSM Partners in Bromsgrove, UK (a 40 minute drive from Birmingham Airport). Please note that registration is open, which you can access via our Events